When it comes to choosing a dedicated server, choosing between the offerings can be daunting, especially when looking at the processors! There are so many that it's almost impossible to compare them.

There are two manufacturers with different technologies

They each have several different product lines

They have the same processors with different numbers of cores

They have the same processors with different added features

Within each product line there are different generations of chips

Within each generation there are different clock speeds

It used to be relatively easy: 486 was better than 386 which was better than 286... but there are no numbers any more. Only cryptic names and multiple variations. If you're not a CPU geek, you're doomed...

My advice for most dedicated servers would be this: go for the one that has the most RAM. Then only try to compare processors. RAM is much more important than you'd think for servers, especially if you have database driven apps.

Now, what I frequently miss is a rough guide to what CPU is newer/better than which others. I tried to put this together below...

As I understand it, here's how I'd order the Intel processors, from the best to the weakest:

Itanium

Xeon

Core2 Extreme

Core2 Quad

Core2 Duo

Pentium Extreme

Pentium Dual-Core

Pentium D

Pentium 4 HT Extreme

Pentium 4 HT

Celeron Dual-Core

Celeron D

Celeron

Here's how I believe you could roughly rank AMD processors (from best to weakest):

Opteron Quad Core

Opteron Dual Core

Phenom

Athlon X2 Dual Core

Athlon 64

Sempron

Keep in mind that there are a lot of variations and lower ranked processor running at a higher clock rate (indicated in GHz) can be faster than a higher ranked processor running a a lower rate. However, double cores almost always beat single cores for servers, even at luch lower clock rates.

Now comparing Intel vs AMD chips is extremely difficult. It almost feels like comapring oranges and apples. So again, my advice would be: compare the number of cores. If one has more cores than the other, it's probably better.

Beyond that, you'd need to get into details about Level 1, Level 2 and Level 3 caches, Front Side Bus speeds and other nerdy specs... Check intel.com and amd.com for juicy details!

We receive a lot of feedback and comments from people purchasing a webhosting account for the first time. One of the most misunderstood events is customer verification. Here is the why and how about this sensitive topic.

Why do customers get verified?

Web hosting is a very legitimate need for most individuals and businesses. Unfortunately it is also an urgent need for hackers and spammers of many kinds. These people will always try to sign up for cheap hosting accounts, especially if there is an x months for free promo. Worse: they will also sign up for more expensive hosting accounts using stolen credit card info!

This is why hosting companies have to remain vigilant about every sign up they get. Unfortunately, this is why you may also have to provide additional info upon signup, which could extend your signup process from a few minutes to a couple of days. For your own safety though...

Today, I talked to Matt Heaton -- CEO of HostMonster and BlueHost -- about their recent quality issues.

One of their major problems was their CPU usage limitation that would frequently block customer scripts from executing normally. Matt told me this was now completely fixed:

"We went from 55,000 blocks PER DAY to just over 250".

The 250 remaining are scripts that actually go wrong, like entering endless loops and things like that.

The other major customer complaint we've been hearing lately was about support quality. Matt attributes this to their recent exploding growth.

"Support isn't there yet, but server quality is there. Support is ALMOST there. We hired 40 people in January. We will be to less than 1 min hold times in less than 20 days. There are all in the training class now (Actually 2 training classes) and will be out soon."

With the additional workforce HM+BH's staff will reach 200 people.

So check back by the end of the month to see if HostMonster's and BlueHost's tech support are back on track.

Looking at BlueHost's track record since 1996, we have reasons to believe they will indeed get things under control.

General

This review of WebHostingBuzz is incomplete. We will add more information in the future.

The company has gone through several technical, strategic and management changes over the years with offerings ranging from spectacular to mediocre.

At this time, we haven't seen enough consistency in the company to make a strong recommendation. We are observing how the situation involves and we monitor our Web Hosting Buzz test site regularly in order to form an opinion.

If you have had recent experiences, good or bad, with Web Hosting Buzz, we invite you to share them below.